<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<mods xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3" version="3.1" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3 http://www.loc.gov/standards/mods/v3/mods-3-1.xsd">
  <titleInfo>
    <title>Mapping immigration policy at the southern border: An administrative and judicial analysis</title>
  </titleInfo>
  <name type="personal">
    <namePart>Lens, Vicki  and Kanelstein, Samantha</namePart>
    <role>
      <roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">creator</roleTerm>
    </role>
  </name>
  <typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource>
  <originInfo>
    <place>
      <placeTerm type="text">Administration &amp; Society</placeTerm>
    </place>
    <issuance>monographic</issuance>
  </originInfo>
  <language>
    <languageTerm authority="iso639-2b" type="code">eng</languageTerm>
  </language>
  <physicalDescription>
    <form authority="marcform">print</form>
    <extent>53(6), Jul, 2021: p.817-843</extent>
  </physicalDescription>
  <abstract>Presidents are increasingly relying on a mode of governing—presidentialism—that produces radical shifts in public policy through the administrative state, rather than through Congress. Most recently, using the tools of the administrative state rather than legislative action, the Trump Administration has reinterpreted the laws governing asylum, especially as to citizens from Central America seeking refuge from violence and dire poverty. Through a legal analysis of the judiciary’s response to these reforms, this article examines the limits and constraints of presidential administrative power. – Reproduced </abstract>
  <subject>
    <topic>Immigration law, Asylum, Presidentialism, Administrative state, Judiciary</topic>
  </subject>
  <relatedItem type="host">
    <name>
      <namePart>Administration &amp; Society  </namePart>
    </name>
  </relatedItem>
  <recordInfo>
    <recordCreationDate encoding="marc">211217</recordCreationDate>
  </recordInfo>
</mods>
